Been playing a little for fun lately, here’s a hand for you guys to discuss.

Just moved to this table less than a round ago. SB is 20-something white guy with sweet cap and hoodie who looks like a guy who likes to make some sweet moves. But I haven’t really seen anyone do anything yet, nor them me.

3-5 with 10 straddle every hand

MP ($700) opens $35
Sb ($900) calls
I’m in Bb ($1800) AcAd
I make it $155
MP folds, SB thinks a sec and calls

6c 7c 9s ($345)

SB checks. What’s my plan?

Stacks are pretty short here, only 90BB for sb in a 3b pot, so not a lot of wiggle room here. It's likely going all in flop or turn and you gotta call it off with so many bluffs sb can have and also with yourself having the redraw to nut flush

Pizza,

While you are totally right in theory, something people have posted about here quite a bit recently is important to keep in mind. Even though it’s really effectively 90BB with the straddle, players at these limits still think about it like 180BB.

I'm betting 200 and calling a shove. Worst cards to see on the turn I think are 8, T, J in that order.

Bet $140. He knows you have AK or an overpair.......so lets bet relatively small and see how he reacts.

I assume this is lucky chances? I've played in this game a bit actually.

Given description of villain I am betting 180 and hoping I induce a monkeyshove. This is by far the most common mistake I expect an average 20something LC 3/5 reg to make. They cannot click the fold button, so they'll shove way too wide here.

I'm sure someone will point out that if we always bet overpairs here it makes our check backs easy to attack (and of course, AA with the BDFD is probably the best overpair to check back if we're ever going to do it). I'm just not sure I care about this given stack sizes and the LC 3/5 player pool.

Bet 250 and get it in by the turn. If he has an OP or a FD, he's not folding. If he has a set or straight, he's not folding either but that just means he's a bad player. Nothing else is calling any meaningful sized bet. Therefore, there's no sense to bet small to keep people in.

I think this is a spot we can attack pretty aggressively with our range on flop and turn without worrying about having a flop check back range. $100, $150, shove. Another benefit of a small cbet is that it could induce a c/r bluff.

The difference between 90BB and 180BB may have influenced SB's decision to call but that doesn't matter once you see the flop. With AA, effective SPR barely over 2 and a flop wet you are entirely committed, it's just a question of bet sizing. $250 sets up a better turn shove.

All,


Glad most of you arrived at a similar conclusion. I posted this pretty simple situation because I’ve seen a bunch of posts lately where people want to either pot control or fold big hands way more than they should at low limits.

I made it 250, he quickly shoved, I quickly called.

Turn was 2c and luckily he didn’t perk up at that, river was some total blank like offsuit 4.

He just sheepishly shook his head and I flipped over my hand.

Yup, not that surprising to be honest. V thought he had FE with a shove versus your overpair range and he was incorrect. WP.

I thought the comment about 180bb v 90bb could mean two things. As others have said, it suggests to V that he has FE when he does not. The other is that he thinks he has odds to setmine here when he does not.

I think it mostly means you find yourself in a lot of spots having to GII with hands like TPgk. It really simplifies these games, ending the action on flop or turn, and that is why bad players love them.

Ironically, If these guys played this aggro style deepstacked they would actually be pretty balanced and do pretty well.

Homeless,

While what you say is often true, you might be surprised at how many players have pretty much the same sizing whether it’s 3-5 or straddled to 3-5-10. Very odd.

Much less awareness of some of those basic concepts in small games like this.

So wouldn't you recommend we avoid short effective stack games because we need such a strong range to get involved? Don't these games have much lower edges for better players compared to deep-stacked?

I've always thought the advantages in winrate playing deep stacks were overrated, especially if you control for variance.

Homeless,

In general, yes, I prefer deeper stacked games. This game used to be 3-5 500max and was pretty stupid. It’s 3-5 1000max now and often has multiple stacks over 1500, and can be a pretty fun game sometimes. When it gets late and stacks get deeper, it’s straddled a lot. You’re right that it does allow some players to play more correctly by just jacking their $500 stacks in early, but when it’s straddled more edge transfers to the better players because they are able to manipulate pot sizes to their advantage and cause other players to make bigger mistakes because they are making the exact same decisions as they’d make for unstraddled amounts. That’s something people in bigger games are much more aware of, which is just part of better overall sizing awareness.

hideous flop. unless V has decided to play JJ as a bluffcatcher, I can't imagine that you are going to get a lot of value out of this hand.

as played, check it and play YOUR hand as a bluffcatcher.

not this. we are basically pot committing ourselves and turning our hand face up. even if he knows we have AA and he is on a draw, there are lots of hands it would be correct for him to shove and be ahead us.

give him some room to bluff.

$250 makes our hand face up. $140 does the opposite, and gives him plenty of room to bluff-raise.